BITS AND PIECES...

During a Town Board agenda item  requested by Yours Truly under the Citizen Input Policy, I once again asked that the minutes and other materials that the Agritourism Task Force was privy to be posted on the Township website.  I stated that citizens should at least have the opportunity to inform themselves fully on this topic before the public hearing that will be held.  I referenced the Transfer Task Force, chaired by Jeff Otto, of which I was part.  All those minutes were posted in a timely manner.  The same should be done with the Agritourism minutes.  Citizens could then follow the comments made by the invited guests to the meetings, as well as understand TKDA Senior Planner Sherri Buss' input at the three meetings she attended to assist the committee  The Board did not respond to me on this issue at the meeting. The Task Force had agreed with my requests at the time, but there were website issues, so perhaps it will be done by the IT Supervisor soon anyway.  Check under "Task Forces" or "Minutes" on the website.

While we are on the subject of the agritourism public hearing, an informative word or two generally:

Any change in land use is a change in zoning.

Any change in zoning requires a public hearing.  This is why there will be a public hearing on agritourism before any Ordinance can be enacted.

Public hearings must be published with ten days' notice in the Township's official newspaper.  This is different from a "posting," which need go only on the official posting place, in our case the bulletin board on the south wall of Town Hall. A Special Meeting of the Board requires a posting with 3 days' notice; it does not require publishing.



The Planning Commission will be reviewing the comment cards from the Open House and any other comments submitted in time for their December 1st meeting.  Since the week before this meeting is Thanksgiving week, I would suggest that any comments you may wish to submit be in to the Clerk by that Tuesday.  Visit the website under "Task Forces" for the ordinance draft language and minority reports.

A second item that was brought up under my "Communication Follow-through" agenda item was the Watershed Ordinance. You may recall that I had attempted to speak to the Board on this subject before but was cut off by the Board Chair.  This time I reminded him that there is no time limit for agenda items under the Policy and was able to complete my thought.  That thought being, "Where is the report that the Board requested of the Planning Commission on this subject?"  This request was made by Chair Miller at some length at the Roundtable meeting wayyyy back in June.  No report has been forthcoming.  Each Commissioner had been invited to submit pros and cons and to "educate" the Board on this matter.  This was said by Miller in response to a Commissioner's noting that she would just be outvoted.  The report was to give each member a chance to express his/her views. What happened?  Why, a Commission vote was taken!  3-2 in favor of recommending that the Board adopt the ordinance. Bare bones. That's it. No requested input submitted.

The Board did not respond to me on this specific matter either and the Planning Commission was not further directed to submit the information requested. Instead, Supervisor Ceminsky was given the task of following up on the mechanics of enforcing the ordinance once adopted.

Empty words? Window dressing?  Best interests of the community?  Why make the request if one isn't even going to expect it to be fulfilled?  Got me.

A third item under "Communication Follow-through" was The Moratorium That Wasn't.  A small group of people, including one Eureka resident, has submitted an application to the state to be licensed to have a medical marijuana manufacturing facility in the Township. This was discussed at a regular Planning Commission meeting and there was even a Special Meeting of the Commission to further discuss it.  The Attorney had brought up the possibility of a moratorium on the use, which would allow the Township to study this before going down the road of having such a facility. Under a moratorium, no such facility could be built until the Township had explored all its options. The Township could take up to a year to conduct its study. The Attorney had recommended a moratorium and the Planning Commission had agreed as a body to recommend it as well.

This is the very type of topic that moratoriums (a) are made for, I suggested to the Board.  However, I pointed out that during the ensuing Board meeting, the moratorium idea was brought up and discussed, but it was never made clear by the Commission liaison and Chair, Butch Hansen, that the Commission was making such a recommendation.  This recommendation was included in the Commission meeting summary prepared, I believe, by the Clerk, but no mention of it was made by the Board either.  The end result was a 3-2 decision (sounding familiar?), with only Supervisors Behrendt and Miller supporting the idea of a moratorium.

ADDED NOTE:  The State accepted twelve such applications, along with a non-refundable $20,000 fee from each.  TWO sets of applicants will be licensed. Notice will be coming soon as to whom was selected.

Last topic on my agenda item was the state statute that regulates "Notice of Meetings."  Under that statute anyone who wishes to be notified via email (or USPS) of any Special Meetings of the Board or Commission can so request.  The Township must provide this notification. The rationale behind this as I would understand it is that only the regular meeting calendar is set at the Reorganizational Meeting following an election. Special Meetings come up as the situation warrants it and require just the notice as mentioned above: easy to miss. SO, if you are a person who likes to stay abreast with what is going on in your community, contact Clerk Mira Broyles to be  placed on this notification list.  Even if you were on such a list before, you should re-request it as Chair Miller instructed the Clerk to build a new list,  The Township can request such renewals under this statute, given appropriate notice as stated therein.

Like  the idea of bringing something to the Board's attention for discussion** outside of a three-minute limited Public Comment?  Check out the Citizen Input Policy.

**I guess we are still working on this aspect!

HOLY HYDROCHLOROTHIAZIDE, BATMAN!!!!!

How's YOUR blood pressure doing?  Mine is cookin' away!  Let me tell you why:


For the Board meeting of September 8th, I had requested under the Citizen Input Policy to be placed on the agenda concerning "Ordinance issues."  Those of you who are longer-time readers might recall I have done this in the past. "Public comments," which occur separately on the agenda are limited in length to three minutes.  Not much time to make a point. (You might recall Chair Storlie's moving my requested agenda item to the three-minute public comment section of the agenda, thus effectively reducing the time I as a citizen had to make my argument.  It seemed to me at the time that perhaps he didn't really want to hear from me at all?!?  I strongly objected to his moving of my item.)     The Citizen Input Policy states "Citizens or groups wishing to address the Board are encouraged to complete Agenda Request Form and request that an item be placed on the agenda  for discussion
at a regular Township Board meeting. Although the policy addresses the time limit on "public comments" at the beginning of a meeting and "random" comments "during a meeting," a close read reveals that there is no time limit given for agenda items that are requested. Bear that in mind: in the normal course of things, people on the agenda are not cut off before they can even present their comments, much less can expect any "discussion" as mentioned in this Board-adopted policy.


Chair Kenny Miller "permitted" me to go through my first Ordinance issue comments without interruption.(Without any discussion at that time, either, I might add.) My comments were regarding the Transfer of Building Rights Ordinance procedure.  I had served on that Task Force, attending all the meetings at which very few Supervisors were ever present and wanted to follow up on a pertinent question that had come up at the Planning Commission meeting the week before.   

However, when I embarked upon my second area of comment which quoted Board and Commission comments from the June 10th Roundtable between the two bodies in regard to the VRWJPO

Water Ordinance, I was quite rudely interrupted.  I was just a few minutes in on my comments as a whole and barely a minute or so on the Water Ordinance item when I became aware of  "sounds of objection" coming from the vicinity of Commissioners Hansen and Cleminson at the side table, as well as Chair Miller cutting me off, saying I had gone beyond my "time limit."  Further, Miller then said emphatically in the direction of the two Commissioners, "She has 40 seconds!"   40 seconds, Mr. Chair, as much as that?

Okay, so this is a Board meeting and the Board Chair responds to two Commissioners who seem to think he should not let me, a concerned citizen, continue to quote the discussion of the Water Ordinance at an OPEN, PUBLIC MEETING of the two bodies, illustrating my concerns. I don't believe they were even recognized by the Chair before the sounds came from their direction. Is this the tail wagging the dog? How conversant is the Board with the adopted policies they are supposed to be following?

My intent in quoting from the Roundtable Meeting was to point out that Commissioners Hansen, Cleminson, and Novacek seemingly "forgot" the Board's directive from that meeting at their September 1 Commission meeting.  On June 10th, the Board had requested "information, fact-finding, individual opinions from the Commission" so that the Board could "responsibly" consider the input and "be educated" on the topic. But what the three Caballeros did was to move to pass the Ordinance on to the Board for adoption, plain and simple, no report.  Commissioner Jennings, supported by Commissioner Barfknecht, had moved to table the vote at least until the minutes from the Special Meeting with the water specialists were complete and approved. WELL, that was voted down 3-2.  Commissioner Novacek's motion was then approved 3-2. (Strangely, the VRWJPO Ordinance matter was not even on the Board agenda for their meeting on the 8th.)

Chair Miller indicated that he thought my comments (which he had scarcely heard the start of) were more appropriate "for a public hearing."  No, Mr. Miller, I would submit to you that that would be way too late if you, as Board Chair, joined by the other supervisors, are not even going to insist beforehand that the Commission provide what you asked for and which Hansen's motion stated they would do.

Is it really too much to ask that Eureka public officials do what they say they are going to do?  Why are some seemingly so uncomfortable at being reminded what they said at a public meeting?

Below are the comments that I had wished to present to the Board:

The second ordinance matter I wish to bring before the Board is that of the Vermillion River Watershed Ordinance.  I speak here as a former Supervisor and a contact person to the VRWJPO.  At the June 10th Roundtable meeting between the Board and the Commission, it was determined that the Planning Commission would review the Ordinance and report to the Board.  When it was raised that a certain Commissioner felt she would just be out-voted, no matter what she contributes, Chair Kenny Miller (starting at approximately 1:42:10) stated, "To respond to one member being out-voted or outweighed, I don't think that there's any vote or out-vote to happen here.  We're looking for information from the panel.  We, responsibly, should weigh one Commission member's fact-finding with what is good for the Township, not against each others' comments.  I want to get from you as a Commission...as a Board, we want to see your individual thoughts so we can weigh them when we make our decision...I think we need to review each member's position and their [sic] input for our own education.  We are going to depend on you to give us information, whether it is singly or as a board. [sic]  You should view all points of it, and you may disagree on whether we should or shouldn't do it, but I am asking you for supporting information, for the pros and cons of this...I would ask that we look at each of your positions and weigh those positions, the pros and the cons.  We want information in front of us."  Butch Hansen made a motion (seconded by Cleminson) that the Planning Commssion "take over the VRWJPO Ordinance review and come back with the information that the Board is seeking."  In the following discussion, Chair Miller again restated that "We are asking you to be an information-gathering [body]."

At the last Planning Commission meeting:

1. The minutes from the Special Meeting of August 18th with Zabel, Slavik, and Watson, were deemed incomplete and were not approved.  Some of the information that was missing from the minutes, for example, was Brian Watson's statements that Eureka has many more challenges than any other township in Dakota County.

2.  It was stated by Chair Hansen that it was "clear" to him that the guests that evening wanted the Township to take over the permitting. It was stated by the guests, more than once, that it does not make a difference to them who does the permitting.  It only matters that the standards are implemented and enforced.  This position of theirs was clear to me as an audience member.

3. It was stated and argued incorrectly by Chair Hansen that the Township review process does not take place side by side with the JPO's review, but, rather, that their review adds much more time.  At each meeting that I have been at, different residents have had their VRWJPO letter in hand.  I have not heard one of them complain about time matters.  AND, as it happens, I was the individual who spoke to the JPO after which they agreed that the Planning Commission could go forward with its review of an application concurrent with the JPO's review, as long as the Board did not approve anything until it had heard from the JPO.  This information and Travis Thiel's email confirming all this has been sent out by me thru the clerk on more than one occasion.

4. Commissioner Hansen even stated that the Board "didn't care" about the Township's taking on the Ordinance--only one Supervisor was in attendance at the meeting all the way thru, he said, and one came a half hour late.  Liaison Behrendt said he did care, but that the meeting was scheduled when he was out of town for a business meeting and he was not able to attend.

5.  Commissoner Novacek made a motion to send the Ordinance to the Board for it to approve it.  Carrie Jennings moved to table that motion at least until the minutes from the special meeting were completed and reviewed.  Her motion failed in a 3-2 vote.  Mr. Novacek's motion passed by a 3-2 vote.

My question is:

WHERE IS THE INFORMATION THAT THE BOARD ASKED BE PRESENTED TO THEM?

                    What's in YOUR medicine cabinet?

ARE YOU "ENGAGED?"

This blog is titled "Engaging Eureka in Governance."  We just passed our first year anniversary back in July!  Time flies... If we might refresh: There are various ways to be engaged in your local government:


One is to attend meetings, whether of the Board, the Commission, public hearings, open houses and so on.  This is probably the best way, enabling you to see for yourself firsthand what takes place, is said, etc.  It can be an eye-opening experience, believe me! It was heartening to me to see that there were several citizens in attendance at the August Board meeting who were there, apparently, just to observe the proceedings, having no business of their own on the agenda that evening.  SUGGESTION:  Send an alternating member of your neighborhood to attend meetings and report to your area.  This relieves one of attending all the time, and yet keeps a number of neighbors up to date.

It is the right of every citizen to be present to observe and listen to discussions leading to Township decisions being made on his/her behalf.  This right is protected by the "Open Meeting Law."  It is unlawful for a quorum of the Board or Commission, or even a Special Committee appointed by the Board (such as the Agritourism Task Force) to have discussions of Township business outside of a public meeting.  This quorum can be "assembled" by way of what is called a "serial meeting," as well as by an outright gathering of three members of the five-member bodies.

Another way to be engaged is to check this blog.  Whether you tend to agree with the opinions expressed here or not, it's a good thing to explore whether there is some item you would like more information on.  This blog is written by citizens who attend the majority, if not all, meetings held in our Township.  We have a concern for the future of our community, which we trust is shared by you.




Better yet, if you subscribe to the blog, as many have done, you will never miss a post.  You will automatically be sent each published post via your email. If you know of neighbors who might be interested, please pass the website on to them.

Reading the newsletter and the website is yet another method of garnering information. The draft and then approved minutes of each and every meeting are to be posted on the website.  Reading these minutes will keep one current at least on what issues are being addressed.  Be aware, the main requirement for the minutes is to record motions, seconds, and votes on Township matters.  It is up to the body in question how much other detail it desires.  This has varied quite a bit over the last several years.  There are lots of comments or attempted actions that never are reported in the minutes, which is why yours truly prefers to attend in person and has done so for some time. You can also request a CD copy of the recorded meetings for the month for a small fee of $5.  Request these copies through the Clerk.  Once the minutes for a particular meeting have been approved, however, the disc is to be destroyed.  Thus, one cannot go back in time to request a CD of a meeting from, say, a month ago---unless those minutes have yet to be approved.  Your right to this recording as well as copies of the minutes and other government-generated data is protected under the "Data Practices Policy." All recordings of all public hearings are preserved indefinitely, as well as those of certain meetings so designated by the Board.

Taking advantage of the "Public Comment" period towards the beginning of each Board meeting is a way to let the Board know of your concerns or opinions. Anyone in the audience wishing to make a public comment is able to do so  There is a time limit involved, and the Board may or may not discuss what you have stated. In the past, most comments received some Board replies; lately, not so much.  If you wish to have Board discussion of your input, you can ask to be heard via an Agenda Item Request. (Form available on website and due no later than noon on the Thursday before a Board meeting.) Citizen Input Policy

Of course, probably the most effective way to be engaged in your community is to VOTE.  The items above are ways to enable yourself to cast an informed vote.  Township elections are held every year on the second Tuesday in March.  One or two supervisor positions are "up" each time around. The Annual Township Meeting is held at 8:15 each and every year on the night of Election Day.  It is at this meeting that the levy is approved by those citizens in attendance. The levy is the only item from that meeting that is binding on the Board, but other citizen comments and recommendations are discussed and sometimes voted on as well.  These non-levy specifics are recommendations only to the Board, and the Board can choose to do what it wishes for these matters.

Be aware that if you are going to be out-of-town on Election Day, you have the option of voting by Absentee Ballot.  It has been known to happen that the absentee ballots have swung an election one way or the other, so this is a very important thing for you to consider. Absentee Ballots

 to all who have endeavored to stay involved and up-to-date on Township affairs.  It is perhaps only human nature to first become involved when something affects you personally.  But as a presenter at a Government Training Session on Ordinances stated, by then "it may be too late to remedy" what the problem is--at least for your situation.

GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT!

For those of you who attend Town Board meetings, you might be familiar with the practice of the Town Board Chair allowing citizens 3 minutes each to speak during the public comment period. The policy reads as follows:
                                                                                                                  
Public Comment Period (Beginning of a Meeting)

Although not required by Township ordinances, a public comment period will be held at the beginning of each Board meeting (following agenda approval) to receive input from individuals in attendance. The "public comment" section of the agenda is your opportunity to address items on the agenda or general comments to the Board. The following procedures will be followed:

Individuals wishing to be heard during this period will be required to sign in and indicate their
intention to speak before moving to speak.
     1. Public comment will be taken after the agenda is approved in the order of signature.
     2. The time allotted for all comments will be no longer than twenty (20) minutes.
     3. After recognition by the Chair, each individual will have up to three (3) minutes
         to speak and cannot assign any remaining time to someone else.  Time may be extended
         by the Chair based on the number of speakers and time available.
     4. Each person will stand up or stand at the podium, if one is available, and give their
         name, address and group affiliation (if applicable) before addressing the Board.
     5. If a group would like to address the Board, an appointed spokesperson will speak for the group.

It is requested that anyone bringing written materials to the meeting have seven (7)copies available - five for the Board, one for the public and one for the official record.

The Township Board supervisors will listen to your comments and may ask questions for clarification. It should be noted that this is a time for listening, not uncontrolled debate. If there is a need for a response from the Board, it should come at a later time when the Board has had time to deliberate the issue, to seek more information, or to take recommendations from its attorney.
(The information above is only a portion taken from the Policy on Citizen Input and Conduct at Township Meetings.)

At the March 10 Town Board meeting two citizens came before the Board with concerns regarding citizens
putting garbage/recycling in the Town Hall containers.  The citizens stated that the sheriff could do nothing about this and asked if the dumping practice was appropriate.  The Chair stated that he was not aware if the Township had a policy regarding this issue. The two citizens went well beyond the 3 minutes allowed and failed to bring the 7 copies of the sheriff's report they read from including 1 copy for the public. After the citizens continued to ask the same question, Chair Miller very politely and patiently stated that citizens should be "reasonable" regarding this matter and utilize "common sense". The citizen stated that she had garbage with her and was wondering if it was okay to dump it in the garbage container as other people seem to be allowed to do so.  The Chair asked the couple to put their concerns in writing and the topic could be discussed at the Reorganization Meeting. (The above comments can be accessed on the public comment portion of the March 10 Town Board meeting CD.)

What was the real motive for this concern? To the best of my knowledge this has NOT been an issue in the past, nor has it been necessary to implement a policy to regulate. Has someone been dumpster diving and checking on whether or not citizens have been putting paper in the Town Hall recycle or garbage containers?

The Town Hall garbage and recycle containers are on public property.  As a citizen, I would prefer that citizens utilize the containers if they find this is necessary rather than leave their trash along the roads where the road contractor picks up the trash at the expense of the citizens.  If I put something in the wastebasket inside the Town Hall, would I then be in violation of a policy which addresses garbage? Are Town Board Supervisors and Planning Commission members allowed to dispose of their volumes of paper work in the outdoor recycle bin? I would hope this is allowed. If a dumpster diver or a drive by citizen finds a piece of personal paper in the garbage or notices a citizen disposing of papers, will it be deemed an offense and worthy of calling the Dakota County Sheriff as has been done in the recent past? Will it be necessary to build an enclosure around the garbage/recycle containers with a secure lock?

The Town Board has many issues to contend with that are certainly more pressing than the dumpster issue.  Who will monitor the garbage/recycle bins? Does the Dakota County Sheriff's office have more important things to do than write reports regarding the garbage? I believe they do.

I highly recommend the Town Board supervisors give serious thought to all aspects of what a policy regarding garbage monitoring on public property would entail prior to the consideration of establishing a policy on managing the garbage containers. My experience has been that many citizens believe the Town Board makes policies and ordinances that over-regulate.  A policy to regulate the use of the Town Hall garbage receptacles, in my opinion, would be gross over-regulation and another expense for citizens to absorb.


For those who are curious as to who might throw something in the trash, it is good to know that dumpster diving on public property is not usually prohibited by law. After all "one person's trash is another's treasure." For those who choose to enhance their life by dumpster diving or are just plain nosey and/or have an agenda, there is a group, Dumpster Diving Together, that you might find of interest. Perhaps you might enjoy How to Dumpster Dive which includes 15 steps. Check the internet!